Comments on: Sixty Hours of Terror: Ten Gunmen, Ten Minutes

By: William

William — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 21:46:04 +0000

I was in the Taj during the attack and was very lucky to avoid the worst of it. If anyone is interested in reading about my experience:

williamspencer.com/mumbai

By: The New Internet Eclectic | The Internet Eclectic

The New Internet Eclectic | The Internet Eclectic — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 13:59:48 +0000

[...] Sixty Hours of Terror (VirginiaQuarterlyReview) [...]

By: Mumbai terror attacks « Thinking Beyond Competition

Mumbai terror attacks « Thinking Beyond Competition — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:33:05 +0000

[...] digest all at once, you can read the four blog posts in the form of which it was originally posted (1, 2, 3, and [...]

By: Zainab Jeewanjee

Zainab Jeewanjee — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:09:30 +0000

What a wealth of detail.

Here’s my recent take on it:

http://zainyjee.wordpress.com/2009/11/26/who-wears-the-taj-crown/

By: The 26/11 Mumbai Attack: How I Lost and Recovered My Liberalism « Cochin Blogger

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:48:49 +0000

[...] http://www.vqronline.org/blog/2009/11/16/2611-ten-gunmen/ [...]

By: Who Wears the Taj (crown)? : South Asia post 26/11 » Pakistan

Who Wears the Taj (crown)? : South Asia post 26/11 » Pakistan — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:43:17 +0000

[...] charged seven people involved in the crimes. The Virginia Quarterly Review has a four part article revealing the ordeal in harrowing detail and after reading it, I’m still stunned. On 26/11 [...]

By: Who Wears the Taj (crown)? « Zainab Jeewanjee

Who Wears the Taj (crown)? « Zainab Jeewanjee — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 05:31:15 +0000

By: A year after ten gunmen held Mumbai hostage | India

A year after ten gunmen held Mumbai hostage | India — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:35:43 +0000

[...] Related links: A exhaustive coverage by Jason Motlagh at VQR. [...]

By: Mumbai, Terrorism and Returning to the Taj Mahal Palace & Tower | Perceptive Travel Blog

Tue, 24 Nov 2009 13:32:09 +0000

[...] chaos of those days of terror in Mumbai are now resolving into a narrative. The Virgina Quarterly Review just published an extraordinary four-part series on it, HBO is airing an equally gripping documentary called Terror in Mumbai. Like everyone else, [...]

By: aarem

aarem — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:09:09 +0000

The statement that the “Hindu maharaja” joined with India against the wishes of his “Muslim subjects” is factually incorrect. The Jammu and Kashmir National Conference, the largest political party and rulers in the ertswhile J&K led by Sheikh Abdullah were staunch in wanting to join India even before the invasion by Pakistani “irregulars”. However, the Maharaja dithered until after the attack, wanting to remain independent till then. When it was no longer possible, he acceded to India to save his people according to the Instrument of Accession passed by the British Parliament under the Independence of India and Pakistan act, because that was the condition placed by India to intervene militarily. The author needs to read up on history before settling for a pre-defined black and white narrative.